Abstract:The CIELAB lightness and chroma values of pixels in five of the eight ISO SCID natural images were modified to produce sample images. Pairs of images were displayed on a calibrated monitor and assessed by a panel of 12 observers with normal color vision using a categorical judgment method. The experimental results showed that assuming the lightness parametric factor k(L)=1 to predict color differences in images, CIELAB performed better than CIEDE2000, CIE94, or CMC, which is a different result to the one found in color-difference literature for homogeneous color pairs. However, observers perceived CIELAB lightness and chroma differences in images in different ways. To fit current experimental data, a specific methodology is proposed to optimize k(L) in the color-difference formulas CIELAB, CIEDE2000, CIE94, and CMC. From the standardized residual sum of squares (STRESS) index, it was found that the optimized formulas, CIEDE2000(2.3:1), CIE94(3.0:1), and CMC(3.4:1), performed significantly better than their corresponding original forms with lightness parametric factor k(L)=1. Specifically, CIEDE2000(2.3:1) performed the best, with a satisfactory average STRESS value of 25.8, which is very similar to the 27.5 value that was found from the CIEDE2000(1:1) formula for the combined weighted dataset of homogeneous color samples employed at the development of this formula [J. Opt. Soc. Am. A25, 1828 (2008), Table 2]. However, fitting our experimental data, none of the four optimized formulas CIELAB(1.5:1), CIEDE2000(2.3:1), CIE94(3.0:1), and CMC(3.4:1) is significantly better than the others. Current results roughly agree with the recent CIE recommendation that color difference in images can be predicted by simply adopting a lightness parametric factor k(L)=2 in CIELAB or CIEDE2000 [CIE Publication 199:2011]. It was also found that the different contents of the five images have considerable influence on the performance of the tested color-difference formulas.

Lightness Threshold Evaluation in Visual Color Matching

Investigation of texture effect on visual colour difference evaluation

Evaluation of Small Suprathreshold Color Differences under Different Background Colors

Study of Color Discrimination Threshold Using CRT Display. Part Ⅱ : Evaluation of Classical Color-Difference Formulae

Color-difference evaluation for digital images using a categorical judgment method.

Colour‐difference Evaluation Using CRT Colours. Part I: Data Gathering and Testing Colour Difference Formulae

The Llab Model For Colour Appearance And Colour Difference Evaluation

Investigations of Suprathreshold Color-Difference Tolerances with Different Visual Scales and Different Perceptual Correlates Using CRT Colors

Study on Color Discrimination Threshold Using CRT Display Part Ⅰ:Analysis of Experimental Data and Human Color Vision Characteristics

Evaluating Lightness Differences under Different Neutral Backgrounds

Perceptual Color-Difference Thresholds for Images under Different Viewing Conditions

Evaluation of Threshold Color Differences Using Printed Samples.

Testing Performance of CIECAM02 in Predicting Perceptual Contrast

Testing the performance ofCIECAM02from 100 to 3500 cd/m<SUP>2</SUP>

Color Difference Evaluation for Wide-Color-gamut Displays.

Colour difference evaluation using display colours

A Comparison of Lightness Contrast Effects in CRT and Surface Colours

Specification For The Chromaticity Of White And Coloured Light Sources

Change of Color Appearance Due to Extremely High Light Level: Corresponding Colors under 100 and 3000 Cd/m2

Testing Uniform Colour Spaces Using Printed Samples.